Given the severity of this bug, the UX of the site is failing anyone who isn't a fulltime sysadmin. Suggestion: big, bold TLDR ("The sky is falling. Check your OpenSSL version right now") with a link on what to do sorted by OS vendor. Step 1: Here's a command to spit out your OpenSSL version. If it is the following string, go to step 2. Step 2: Here's how to update your OpenSSL. Here are links to guides on reissuing…
The Heartbleed Bug
61–70 of 547 posts
Re: The Heartbleed Bug
#62As of now (21:04 UTC) this isn't fixed in Debian https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2014-0160 nor Ubuntu http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/cve/2014/CVE-20... Got a long night ahead :/
Re: The Heartbleed Bug
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not affected directly on Mac OS: OpenSSL 0.9.8y 5 Feb 2013
[deleted]
$ sw_vers
ProductName: Mac OS X
ProductVersion: 10.9.2
BuildVersion: 13C64
$ openssl version
OpenSSL 0.9.8y 5 Feb 2013Re: The Heartbleed Bug
#64Re: The Heartbleed Bug
#65As of now (21:04 UTC) this isn't fixed in Debian https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2014-0160 nor Ubuntu http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/cve/2014/CVE-20... Got a long night ahead :/
I just did a apt-get update and apt-get upgrade and I saw upgrades for openssh-client and openssh-server.
Re: The Heartbleed Bug
#66A couple more data points: I'm running Fedora 19 and Arch on my main dev machines/VMs and as of this posting are considered up-to-date. Both are vulnerable: [Fedora19] $ openssl version OpenSSL 1.0.1e-fips 11 Feb 2013 [Arch] $ openssl version OpenSSL 1.0.1f 6 Jan 2014
Not affected directly on Mac OS: OpenSSL 0.9.8y 5 Feb 2013
Re: The Heartbleed Bug
#67As of now (21:04 UTC) this isn't fixed in Debian https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2014-0160 nor Ubuntu http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/cve/2014/CVE-20... Got a long night ahead :/
Re: The Heartbleed Bug
#68Is it a problem for those using ssh keys on github ?
Re: The Heartbleed Bug
#69This thing has been in the wild for two years. What are the odds it hasn't been systematically abused? And what does this imply? To me it sounds kind of like finding out the fence in your backyard was cut open two years ago. Except in this case the backyard is two thirds of the internet.
Worse, it's retroactively unfixable: Even doing all this [revoking certs, new secret keys, new certificates] will still leave any traffic intercepted by the attacker in the past still vulnerable to decryption. So it would be a good idea to change all your passwords to critical services like email and banks, once they have issued new certs and updated their openssl.
Re: The Heartbleed Bug
#70[deleted]
No, Bitcoin doesn't use SSL/TLS. It could have implications for Bitcoin web services that use HTTPS, of course.
But, with the "rpcssl=1" option, the reference Bitcoin client's RPC interface would be using SSL, and specifically OpenSSL.
I'd guess a ton of online Bitcoin services reliant on hot wallets do this. So cue the thefts, or 'thefts', any minute now.